As the Senate prepares to debate the issue of immigration on June 10, the pro-gun organization Gun Owners of America has a message, albeit a controversial message, for Second Amendment supporters,”You could lose all your guns before 2035 under the Amnesty Bill before the Senate.”

Pew Poll Demographics on Gun Ownership

How can that be?

Well, according to a GOA ‘Action Alert,’ which bears the title of the aforementioned message, the immigration reform bill “will create at least 11.5 million new citizens — but probably closer to 20 million — and, if history is any guide, they will vote 71 percent of the time for far left Democrats like Barack Obama.”

The Action Alert breaks down the numbers further, stating that “the two political parties nationally, stand in a delicate political balance. Mitt Romney lost the presidency by 334,000 votes in four states (Florida, Ohio, Virginia and New Hampshire). So if you add a net gain of almost 8.5 million Obama voters to the electorate, the same amnesty that turned California ‘blue’ will probably turn the whole country anti-gun as well.”

GOA Executive Director Larry Pratt has iterated this theory over the past few weeks on radio shows and pro-gun rallies across the country. At a pro-Second Amendment gathering in Morrisville, Pennsylvania, in early May, Pratt explained why immigration reform matters to gun owners:

Why do we care about an immigration bill? Well, frankly, it’s a matter of numbers. If you bring in a whole bunch of Democrats into the country, most of them are going to vote to take away our guns. And in a few years, that’s exactly what would happen. So, we don’t want the other problems that come with that, but just from a Second Amendment point of view, we have a dog in that fight and it’s important that we keep that bill down.

On Steve Deace’s conservative radio program, Pratt doubled down on the warning, though he first made assumptions about the immigrants who would be given amnesty were this bill to pass, commenting specifically about their education level, their work ethic and their overall capacity to contribute to this country.

“Yet the people that would be coming in illiterate in Spanish, they’re going to be Democrats, they’re going to be dependents, they’re not going to be working at a nuclear reactor or a car factory, they’re going to be probably just sitting around drawing welfare and voting Democrat,” said Pratt.

He then went on to say, “What they’re doing then by bringing in this many Democrats, if they were to do that, means that by the time you get all of those folks into their citizenship status, our guess was about 2035, you can say buh bye to your guns and buh bye to the rest of your freedom because this would be a country that had been californicated.”

While some within the gun community will view Pratt’s comments as prejudicial and inflammatory, others will likely heed his commentary as cogent political analysis of real data and actual polling numbers. Yet, some will probably view his statements as a combination of the two, dismissive and unfair to millions of hard-working and competent illegal immigrants, but also true in the sense that many immigrants — upon becoming U.S. citizens — tend to vote for a Democrat/liberal agenda.

The question is, where do you come out on this? Does Pratt make a valid point? Does he go too far with what some might consider ‘anti-immigrant remarks’?